They should keep the law in effect banning gifts to Physicians. In fact they should expand it to all States!!

2:31 pm June 25, 2010

emc wrote :

The question is not gifts or no gifts -- it's transparency. And as the article makes clear, many pharma and biotech companies are willing to disclose their payments. So what's the problem?

2:35 pm June 25, 2010

broke wrote :

don't these $#%$ make enough without bribes

2:50 pm June 25, 2010

money buys prescriptions wrote :

get the physician's SSN, and send a 1099 at the end of each year showing how much was spent on the physician and have the physician report it as earned income. Increases taxes so states and federal tax win.
The physicians do not go to the exhibitor lectures for CE they go for the food and give aways. Attend one of the physician meetings, you would be shocked!

3:36 pm June 25, 2010

HotPanini wrote :

This legislation and the idea behind it is dumb. If your physician changes your treatment reigmen due to pens and notepads that he/she recieved, its time to get a new physician.

As to a "relationship of repricocity", there is one - the physician gets a meal and the sales rep gets to tell them about their new drug. Would it be nice if physicians did all of this research on their own? Yes. Do they? No. The fastest way to get most docs to prescribe something is to make sure they get a lot of money through reimbursement or high-prices on out-of-pocket payments. If you want anything besides their pocketbook weighing in on the decision either people have to be allowed to talk to them or docs (as a group) need to miraculously become less money-driven.

3:41 pm June 25, 2010

Dr. J. wrote :

When my orthopedic, psychiatry and ophthalmology colleagues make as much or more than their patient care income by providing Pharma funded "educational presentations" I have to wonder. Their patients don't know that their orthopedist also works for the company that manufactures their new knee joint...a new-version joint that may fail in a few years .Or that their psychiatrist helps market, and prescribes, a new version of an anti-depressant that is 10 times the price of the one that's working just fine now.
The amount of cash that flows to practicing physicians from the companies that supply devices and drugs prescribed by doctors needs to be disclosed. There should be a sign each and every doctor's office and exam room, in large print:
I RECEIVED $300,000 LAST YEAR FROM:

Sadly, doctors are influenced by drug marketing. There' have been dozens of studies to test this. A researcher looked at all of them and concluded "Attending sponsored CME events and accepting funding for travel or lodging for educational symposia were associated with increased prescription rates of the sponsor's medication. Attending presentations given by pharmaceutical representative speakers was also associated with nonrational prescribing." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10647801?dopt=Abstract

Massachusetts is trying to inject ethical behavior into drug marketing. The industry can share its information, just not buy fancy meals. "Consulting" must be disclosed.

I hope the present law is given a chance.

4:58 pm June 25, 2010

md2 wrote :

How about no TV pharma ads, so patients don't come in demanding the latest and greatest (and most expensive) meds available? There is an extensive consumer driven market as well.

While we're at it, why not ban those Sokolov/lawyer ads,'Have you or a family member been injured...'

6:36 pm June 25, 2010

IMAMD wrote :

Physicians are influenced by industry gifts and marketing, but politicians apparently are not. Someone should study this amazing difference between our physician caregivers and lawyer politicians. Maybe we should require our doctors to go to law school first so that they can learn to be more resistent to the influence of money.

7:40 pm June 25, 2010

vtpedimd wrote :

There is a way for physicians to get a nice meal and unbiased information: it is called academic detailing. Vermont's Area Health Education Center (AHEC) sponsors several presentations that provide up to date, well-researched information, on topics such as depression, to healthcare providers in their offices or local hospitals. Why not have the pharmaceutical companies subsidize these, and the cost of meals, preventing the restaurant business from suffering an economic hit, and providing accurate information to physicians and allied healthcare professionals? If a pharmaceutical company's product is safe, effective and makes sense economically, it will be prescribed.

12:58 am June 27, 2010

Hypocritical wrote :

If they're going to ban physicians from receiving gifts, they should do so for politicians as well. Politicians have a far greater effect on their constituents than a physician could hope to achieve during his/her career.

So, what's with the double standard then? Either cut off all gifts, etc, for politicians as well or repeal this idiotic law.

9:39 am June 27, 2010

John wrote :

Seriously folks, $300K+ per year physicians mis-prescribing drugs because they get free pens and notepads? Maybe I'll go down to the local medical school and see if I can set off a physician riot by scattering a few dozen dimes on the floor. Its obviously important to know who is funding a research study or whether your continuing education lecturer is on a corporate retainer, but worrying about pens and $10 lunches strikes me as a bit of a witch hunt.

If anyone on this thread has access to IMS, it should be pretty easy to check whehter this law has had any effect on actual prescribing habits. I have a free pen for anyone who who invests a few hours checking up on this and posts the data.

12:20 pm June 27, 2010

Formerly first in man, now last in man wrote :

As a result of the hostile attitude towards physicians, industry and in turn innovation, Europe has now overtaken Boston and the US in healthcare discovery and delivery. The Europeans no longer attend our conferences because the drugs and devices are already approved for use in Europe long before they are approved in the US. The Europeans laugh at us because we cannot even demonstrate the use of a device in a live case at a conference, even though the device is being used daily in Europe! The US used to be known as innovators, doing "first in man" research. Now that research is done in Europe and the rest of the world. The Europeans laugh, and now refer to Boston as "the last in man".

9:12 pm June 27, 2010

Reality Check wrote :

It is important that the legislators in Massachusetts understand the harm that the law has done on businesses in Massachusetts. Life sciences companies are moving out of the state, clinical trials that would have gone to Massachusetts are now going to other states. The Affordable Care Act (Health Care Reform) includes the transparency provisions and will preempt the "gift ban."

Now is the time to put away empty rhetoric against working with industry and for the commonwealth to embrace industry with support vs meeting them with swords at the boarder.

To the punk who suggests that physicians travel to Vermont for a meal on the local Area Health Education Council (AHEC), they should move their and eat the ice cream, that is the extent of Vermont's medical progress. Maple Syrup and Ice Cream is not a formula for Massachusetts success.

8:56 am June 28, 2010

MTG wrote :

PHRMA Manufacturers changed their code of ethics/conduct back in 2009 that pharma companies would no longer give out "gifts/trinkets" or take physicians out to lunch or dinner. Most pharma companies follow these guidelines. The Mass law bans physicians from accepting gifts even though pharma companies haven't been giving them out! Where the law differs is that educational programs cannot be done off site with a meal which is what is hurting local businesses.

I agree that the same ban on gifts should be applied to politicians as well as any industry! See how everyone likes that!

9:13 am June 28, 2010

PNHP doctor wrote :

It's the gifts that are the problem with Medicine in America today.
The lawmakers know what it's all about. Let's continue a government ban on collective bargainingby physicians, continue to exclude health insurance co's from antitrust collusion laws, continue to subsidize pharmaceutical co's and insurance co's via Part D, continue to subsidize health insurance co's via Medicdare advantage plans, continue to forbid Medicare insurance from bidding on a drug formulary.
Let's continue to have drug and insurance co's give our senators and congresspeople millions of dollars in direct payouts (Baucus got $4,000,000 from big insurance last year).
Let's put all our efforts to clean up medicine into those physician gifts from pharmaceutical Co's.

6:21 pm June 29, 2010

omg wrote :

this topic is an example of why the public doesn't get it. the thought that doctors are using drugs and devices because of free lunch ( I know all the studies) is crap. So, how do doctors get informed on the new drugs and devices....patients ask for name brands they see on TV and the doctor needs to get info on the new stuff. New devices may benifit patients but using them means training who will provide it an who will pay for it (cadavers cost money). In days of old doctors took time to go to regional or national centers or big names and take training...now with rules for cme and moc (maintainance of certification) new requirements for keeping certification, the cost is large and time away from practice is expensive.

If the gov wants to limit my interaction with the vendors let them come up with a plan for my education and the extra $ to cover training, I'll buy the lunch.

2:07 pm June 30, 2010

This is a nationwide problem wrote :

I'm an accredited provider of CME programs at a medical facility. The strain that our government has put on the accredited provider has taken a turn for the worsE. Accredited CME providers are dropping out and no longer providing education of any kind that due to the unfair and "guilty until proven innocent" philosophy that is put on the providers. What a shame... when the only people it's going to hurt are our physicians being able to enhance the very reason they went to medical school.......TO REMAIN AS UPDATED IN THE MEDICAL FIELD AS POSSIBLE AND TO MAKE PATIENTS BETTER. SHAME ON OUR GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!